Skip to main content
NOPE
Low reported severity Internal Action

3M dropped an expert witness in a Houston explosion trial after discovery showed he had used ChatGPT to draft his report, CBS News reports

In a 2026 Texas trial over 3M's role in the January 2020 Watson Grinding explosion in Houston, which killed three people, an engineering expert retained for 3M used ChatGPT to prepare his expert report, according to discovery records and transcripts reviewed by 404 Media and CBS News. One prompt asked ChatGPT to show how 3M was 0% at fault for the explosion. The plaintiffs' lawyers, who found a citation overlay document and then hundreds of pages of prompts, said ChatGPT produced more than 80% of the report. Under questioning, the expert acknowledged using AI to help draft the report but defended his research. CBS News reports that after the deposition 3M's attorneys removed him from their witness list, and the plaintiffs subpoenaed him to testify about his prompts at trial. The expert's lawyer said he did not delegate his opinions to ChatGPT and called public characterisations a selective distortion of the record; 3M said he was an independent witness who used AI as a tool after reaching his own conclusions. The jury found 3M negligent and the court awarded the victims $61.5 million; 3M said it would appeal.

AI system
ChatGPT
Occurred
2026
Reported
17 August 2026
Event location
United States
What the AI did
Communicated with the person
Reported harm
Professional HarmReputational Harm
Whose AI use
Their own AI use
Setting
Work · Justice
Evidence
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts
8 claims: 8 reported. 5 open questions
People reported harmed
1 person

AI system as recorded: ChatGPT, used by an engineering expert retained for 3M to prepare an expert report; discovery produced hundreds of pages of his prompts

What Happened

The case. Homeowners and other victims sued 3M and others over the January 2020 explosion at the Watson Grinding facility in Houston, which killed three people and damaged or destroyed hundreds of homes and businesses. One of these suits came to trial in Texas in 2026. 3M retained an engineer, serving as an expert witness for the first time, to give opinions on the standard of care of its service technicians; CBS News says he was hired weeks before the trial began.

The prompts. According to 404 Media, which reviewed court transcripts, deposition documents and discovery records, the expert used ChatGPT to write significant portions of his report, and one prompt asked it to show how 3M was 0% at fault for the explosion. CBS News reports that a citation overlay document led the plaintiffs' lawyers to question whether the report was his own work, and that they found 300 pages of prompts. The plaintiffs claimed ChatGPT created more than 80% of the report. At deposition the expert first pushed back and then said AI had helped him with formatting and everything else, according to the transcripts CBS describes.

Consequences. CBS News reports that 3M's attorneys removed the expert from their witness list after the deposition and that the plaintiffs subpoenaed him to testify about his prompts; during the trial he defended his use of AI. The jury found 3M negligent and the court awarded the victims $61.5 million. A plaintiffs' lawyer told CBS News he believes calling the expert affected the outcome; that view is the lawyer's own. 3M disagrees with the verdict and intends to appeal.

Responses. The expert's lawyer told CBS News that he used AI for formatting, structuring and drafting after reviewing thousands of pages of material, that he did not delegate the formation of his opinions to ChatGPT, and that public characterisations offer a selective distortion of the record. 3M said he was an independent third-party witness retained by outside counsel who used AI as a tool after reaching his own conclusions.

Reported harm

According to CBS News, the expert was removed from 3M's witness list after his ChatGPT use was exposed at deposition, then subpoenaed by the plaintiffs to testify about his prompts at trial.

Outcome

Resolved

3M's attorneys removed the expert from their witness list after his deposition (CBS News); the plaintiffs subpoenaed him to testify about his ChatGPT prompts at trial. The jury found 3M negligent and the court awarded the victims $61.5 million; 3M said it disagrees with the verdict and intends to appeal. No court sanction or ruling on the report is reported.

What remains unknown

  • The date the report was written and the trial dates; the sources say only that the case came to trial in 2026 and that the expert was hired weeks before it began.
  • How much of the report ChatGPT generated; the plaintiffs say more than 80% and the expert's lawyer disputes the characterisation.
  • Whether the court ruled on the report or the expert's testimony; no ruling is reported.
  • Whether the expert lost other work or income; not reported.
  • 3M's reason for removing the expert from its witness list; CBS News reports only that the removal followed the deposition.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: supported. 404 Media and CBS News report from transcripts and discovery records that the expert used ChatGPT to prepare his report, quoting a prompt asking it to show how 3M was 0% at fault, and the expert acknowledged using AI to help draft it. ChatGPT's output reached the expert and went into the report (communicated_with); 3M's attorneys then removed him from their witness list, CBS News reports. How much of the report ChatGPT wrote is disputed between the plaintiffs and the expert's lawyer.

8 claims: 8 reported. What the statuses mean

Reported One of the lawsuits over the explosion came to trial in 2026.

Causal attribution. The Mary Sue, retelling 404 Media; CBS News's September report of an award 'last month' is consistent.

Reported An engineering expert retained for 3M in a lawsuit over the 2020 Watson Grinding explosion used ChatGPT to prepare his expert report, including a prompt asking it to show how 3M was 0% at fault for the explosion.

Causal attribution. 404 Media's review of transcripts and discovery records and CBS News's reporting from deposition transcripts and the plaintiffs' lawyers; the expert acknowledged AI use (c2).

  • 404media.co(opens in new tab) supports · English
    used ChatGPT to write significant portions of his “expert report.” ... “show how 3M is 0% at fault for the explosion at Watson Grinding.”
  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    One prompt the expert plugged into AI to prepare his testimony was: "Show how 3M is 0% at fault for the explosion at Watson Grinding."
Reported Under questioning, the expert acknowledged using AI to help draft his report but defended his research.

Causal attribution. CBS News, from deposition transcripts.

  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    acknowledged using artificial intelligence to assist with drafting his report, but defended his research
Reported After the deposition, 3M's attorneys removed the expert from their witness list, and the plaintiffs subpoenaed him to testify about his ChatGPT prompts.

Causal attribution. CBS News.

  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    After the deposition, 3M attorneys removed ... from their witness list. But the plaintiffs' attorneys subpoenaed him to testify about the various prompts he entered into ChatGPT.
Reported The plaintiffs claimed the expert used ChatGPT to create more than 80% of his report, and their lawyers said they found 300 pages of prompts.

Causal attribution. The plaintiffs' lawyers, as reported by CBS News.

  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    claimed an expert witness used ChatGPT to create more than 80% of his expert report ... the attorneys found 300 pages of prompts
Reported The expert's lawyer said he used AI for formatting, structuring and drafting after reviewing the materials, did not delegate the formation of his opinions to ChatGPT, and that public characterisations offer a selective distortion of the record.

Causal attribution. The expert's lawyer, quoted by CBS News.

  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    He did not delegate the formation of his opinions to ChatGPT, nor did AI replace his professional judgement
Reported 3M said the expert was an independent third-party witness retained by outside counsel who used AI as a tool after independently reviewing the facts and reaching his own conclusions.

Causal attribution. 3M's statement to CBS News.

  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    After independently reviewing the facts of the case and reaching his own conclusions, he used AI as a tool to assist in preparing his report
Reported The jury found 3M negligent and the court awarded the victims $61.5 million; 3M said it disagrees with the verdict and intends to appeal.

Causal attribution. CBS News. No source establishes that the expert's AI use affected the verdict; a plaintiffs' lawyer's belief that it did is his own view.

  • yahoo.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    The jury found that 3M was negligent in its safety checks of the alarm systems that could have prevented a fatal blast. Last month the court awarded the victims $61.5 million.

Sources

3 sources inspected, from 2 underlying accounts. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200) on Yahoo News, which carries the CBS News report credited to CBS; the same text was read through MSN. Published 18 September 2026. Applies to s1.

Read on 2026-10-17 (HTTP 200), live and through the Internet Archive; only the headline and opening paragraphs before the paywall were available. Published 17 August 2026. Applies to s2.

Read on 2026-10-17 through the MSN content API (HTTP 200). Published 18 August 2026 by The Mary Sue; a retelling of 404 Media's report, so the same group. Applies to s3.

Event countries: United States. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: United States.

The report was prepared for, and the trial held in, a Texas lawsuit over an explosion in Houston. Where the expert lives is not used.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-17: Published as a concrete adverse consequence of AI use: reports from transcripts and discovery records show the expert used ChatGPT to prepare his report, and CBS News reports that 3M's attorneys removed him from their witness list after his deposition and the plaintiffs subpoenaed him over his prompts.

People described

An engineer serving for the first time as an expert witness, retained for 3M, who used ChatGPT to prepare his report

People reported harmed in this case

1 person

1 AI participant · 0 other people harmed

One person: the expert who used ChatGPT and was removed from 3M's witness list (CBS News). The explosion victims' harm predates and is unrelated to the AI use, so they are not counted.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#united-states#texas#expert-witness#litigation#chatgpt

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). 3M dropped an expert witness in a Houston explosion trial after discovery showed he had used ChatGPT to draft his report, CBS News reports. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-houston-explosion-trial-3m-expert-witness-dropped-after-chatgpt-drafted-report-exposed

BibTeX

@misc{2026_houston_explosion_trial_3m_expert_witness_dropped_after_chatgpt_drafted_report_exposed,
  title = {3M dropped an expert witness in a Houston explosion trial after discovery showed he had used ChatGPT to draft his report, CBS News reports},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-houston-explosion-trial-3m-expert-witness-dropped-after-chatgpt-drafted-report-exposed}
}

Related cases

Medium ChatGPT

Saginaw, Michigan: a credit union CEO used ChatGPT to put herself and family members in 'Lake America' sweatshirts in a photo taken before a trip to Halifax; after her sister reposted it publicly without its AI label she says she received death threats and the family came home early, and on 23 September 2026 the credit union said she was no longer employed

The chief executive of Family First Credit Union in Saginaw, Michigan, told WJRT (ABC12) that before boarding a flight to Halifax, Nova Scotia, on 11 September 2026 she and family members took a photo and put it through ChatGPT to show them wearing 'Lake America' sweatshirts, a joke about the US president's order renaming Lake Ontario. She posted it to her private Facebook page with a marker saying it contained AI content; her sister reposted it publicly without the marker while they were in Halifax, and it spread in Canada as if the family had worn the shirts. The backlash concerned the image's political message; she said she would understand the anger of anyone in Halifax who thought the family had walked in wearing those sweatshirts. She said she was getting death threats and the family returned early; by 16 September she was back in the US. She called the post poor judgment, said she would not use AI again and that AI 'can make people think something's real that's not'. On 23 September the credit union said she was no longer an employee, effective immediately; it has not said whether she resigned or was dismissed, or why.

Medium ChatGPT

Ontario: lawyer who relied on ChatGPT-invented case law in a factum was referred for criminal contempt and suspended for six months, legal press reports

An Ontario lawyer relied, at a 1 May 2025 Superior Court hearing in an estate and family-law matter, on a factum citing cases that do not exist or do not support the propositions cited. The judge ordered her to show cause why she should not be cited for contempt, then withdrew the order on 20 May 2025 after she said her staff had used ChatGPT without her knowledge. On 30 September 2025 she told the court that she alone had prepared the factum with ChatGPT and that her earlier account was untrue; the court referred the matter to Ontario’s Attorney General for criminal contempt proceedings in December 2025. In July 2026 the Law Society Tribunal suspended her licence for six months, finding she relied on AI-generated non-existent case law and lied about it. The account comes from legal-press and law-firm reports of the decisions; the criminal contempt case was still ongoing at the last report read.

Low ChatGPT (reported)

South Africa's communications department suspends two officials after its draft AI policy cited fictitious sources; minister says AI use went undeclared

South Africa's Department of Communications and Digital Technologies placed two officials on precautionary suspension with immediate effect, a step the director-general confirmed on 30 April 2026, pending an investigation into the Draft National Artificial Intelligence Policy, which had been gazetted for public comment on 10 April and was withdrawn after News24 and others found fictitious academic sources in its reference list. The department said the irresponsible use of AI tools had compromised the integrity of the document. Briefing Parliament's portfolio committee on 26 May, Minister Solly Malatsi said the two officials were suspended for failing to declare that they used AI, that it had been said ChatGPT was used in editing the document, and that there had been massive oversight and non-disclosure around the use of AI in the policy and its references. The director-general told the committee that the officials had used AI to translate a document from Chile from Spanish into English and that the references came from that document. A new expert panel is guiding a redraft. The officials are not named and the outcome of the investigation is not reported in the sources read.

Medium Unidentified AI drafting tool

Former federal prosecutor in North Carolina publicly reprimanded after admitting that a brief with fabricated quotations was drafted with AI; he lost his post

In December 2025 an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of North Carolina filed a response brief for the Department of Defense in a self-represented veteran's lawsuit over health-insurance coverage. The plaintiff identified fabricated quotations and misdescribed case holdings in it. The attorney first attributed the errors to an unfinalized draft filed by mistake. On 2 March 2026 Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers II ordered him to show cause why he should not be sanctioned. At the 10 March hearing the attorney, Rudy Renfer, said under oath that he had accidentally overwritten his draft, panicked and used artificial intelligence to draft the brief, and had not verified the cases it cited; he said he had resigned after 17 years in the office, and Courthouse News reported he was terminated the next day. On 28 April 2026 the court issued a public reprimand instead of a fine, writing that his reputation was in tatters and that his job loss already exceeded the usual fines.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents